Quinn- Do you believe that there is any fire to the possibility of making the Cotton Bowl into a BCS Bowl, or rather is it at this point pure speculation?Thanks,

It's well beyond speculation at this point, but with plenty of caveats.

What we know is this: if there ever is an extra BCS game, it will be called the "<sponsor name> Cotton Bowl". The reason is the new Cowboys stadium and having a fine ambassador/businessman like Jerry Jones pushing for it. He's done a great job bringing some great college football games there recently, with some nice ones being worked on like BYU vs TCU.

As for a market, "Dallas" makes sense for a Big 12 tie-in over Phoenix at this point.

And if the MWC got an autobid, perhaps you'd see the current BCS schools agree to an extra BCS game like the Cotton Bowl so that they won't just not have to worry about losing an extra at-large bid, but with a new game and a MWC bid, there would be a new at-large bid that would likely go to a BCS conference. Based on the recent rankings and with the Boise defection to the MWC, it would likely mean your have in most years: 12 total bids: 2 SEC, 2 B10, 2 Big 12, 2 Pac-10, 1 BE, 1 ACC, 1 MWC., 1 at-large to ACC, Big East, MWC or other.

Of course the easiest way for Jerry Jones to get his stadium and a "Cotton Bowl" in the mix would be for the BCS to simply add the Cotton Bowl to the 5 game rotation. So instead of doubling up at the same venue for 2 weeks in a row, you'd have one of the bowls be the dedicated National Championship game. It's a step backwards from what the system is now, but would not require any changes in number of bids.

but again, this is all speculation in that the Cotton Bowl is still on the outside. But Jerry Jones and the other interested parties in the region are doing everything the right way to make themselves as a real option. If you're options were San Diego (Holiday Bowl), Atlanta (Chick-fil-a Bowl), Orlando (Capital One Bowl), Tampa (Outback Bowl), or Dallas (Cotton Bowl), it's easy to see that the Cotton Bowl really rises to the top.

The system is what it is now and there are no signs of any changes coming. I don't think though that the Cotton Bowl will be brought into any serious discussions until/if the MWC is granted a waiver and an auto-bid. At that point, it will make some sense for the other BCS conferences to consider new means to replace the lost revenue with the MWC taking an $18 million chunk rather than the occasional at-large bid money.

And there's the issue of the current BCS deal with ESPN. Again, Cotton Bowl might not be a factor to discuss until the current contract ends. That said, ESPN has historically shown more flexibility in makign changes on the fly when the changes benefit them.

Quinn- Do you believe that there is any fire to the possibility of making the Cotton Bowl into a BCS Bowl, or rather is it at this point pure speculation?Thanks,

It's well beyond speculation at this point, but with plenty of caveats.

What we know is this: if there ever is an extra BCS game, it will be called the "<sponsor name> Cotton Bowl". The reason is the new Cowboys stadium and having a fine ambassador/businessman like Jerry Jones pushing for it. He's done a great job bringing some great college football games there recently, with some nice ones being worked on like BYU vs TCU.

As for a market, "Dallas" makes sense for a Big 12 tie-in over Phoenix at this point.

And if the MWC got an autobid, perhaps you'd see the current BCS schools agree to an extra BCS game like the Cotton Bowl so that they won't just not have to worry about losing an extra at-large bid, but with a new game and a MWC bid, there would be a new at-large bid that would likely go to a BCS conference. Based on the recent rankings and with the Boise defection to the MWC, it would likely mean your have in most years: 12 total bids: 2 SEC, 2 B10, 2 Big 12, 2 Pac-10, 1 BE, 1 ACC, 1 MWC., 1 at-large to ACC, Big East, MWC or other.

Of course the easiest way for Jerry Jones to get his stadium and a "Cotton Bowl" in the mix would be for the BCS to simply add the Cotton Bowl to the 5 game rotation. So instead of doubling up at the same venue for 2 weeks in a row, you'd have one of the bowls be the dedicated National Championship game. It's a step backwards from what the system is now, but would not require any changes in number of bids.

but again, this is all speculation in that the Cotton Bowl is still on the outside. But Jerry Jones and the other interested parties in the region are doing everything the right way to make themselves as a real option. If you're options were San Diego (Holiday Bowl), Atlanta (Chick-fil-a Bowl), Orlando (Capital One Bowl), Tampa (Outback Bowl), or Dallas (Cotton Bowl), it's easy to see that the Cotton Bowl really rises to the top.

The system is what it is now and there are no signs of any changes coming. I don't think though that the Cotton Bowl will be brought into any serious discussions until/if the MWC is granted a waiver and an auto-bid. At that point, it will make some sense for the other BCS conferences to consider new means to replace the lost revenue with the MWC taking an $18 million chunk rather than the occasional at-large bid money.

And there's the issue of the current BCS deal with ESPN. Again, Cotton Bowl might not be a factor to discuss until the current contract ends. That said, ESPN has historically shown more flexibility in makign changes on the fly when the changes benefit them.

Hey Quinn, Thanks for answering my question very well- I believe that the MWC's Aq Status wil go hand Cotton Bowl- Keep your fingers crossed if your an MWC Fan, as it would be a major positive factor if Jerry Jones and Friends, push to make the Cotton Bowl AQ, the resulting effects of their clout may push the MWC over the top into BCS Aq Status.

Should be interesting to see if it happens. I think we can all say that based on previous performance over the evaluation period, and the fact that the BCS AQ might be gone in 2014, that if that is the case, than it can't hurt to throw the MWC a bone for 2 seasons.

It would seem that if the AQs are scrapped, the compromise to the rest of FBS will be the +1 scenario. Of course, it won't be perfect. Because it seems the winds are blowing towards a return to the old system (Rose bowl being Pac12 vs Big Ten, etc) and that after the games, the top 2 would play. So you might still find a system where you have a 2 vs 12 in the bowl game with 3 vs 5, and then school ranked #3 leapfrogging #2.

Best bet would still be to:1) setup 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 REGARDLESS of conference affiliation2) add a new "BCS" level bowl game (meaning a big payday for say, Cotton)3) Then you'd have a rotation of the 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 games between:Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton, Sugar, Orange 4) with the +1 game being elsewhere5) then you have 12 schools in high profile games with the eventual 1 and 2 in the final

Meanwhile, it makes it tough for schools outside the good ole boy conferences, so it adds no benefit to the MWC

Quinn, I'm with you on everything but your tidbit about 1v4 2v3 "REGUARDLESS" of conference affiliation...I agree 1-4 should be included but seeding should flexible.

Take 2008- #1 was Florida #2 was OU #3 was Texas and #4 was Bama, if we did strictly 1-4 seeding you get the conference members playing each other, flexible seeding should be used like they do in baseball (NCAA and MLB) and NCAA basketball. Florida v Texas and OU v Bama would drive TV ratings and national interest, the other way could be bad. What if Bama beat Florida (who just played in the SEC CCG) Florida fans would be pissed (much like LSU fans will be if they lose), why even play the CCG? If this was the system and two SEC teams ended up in the NCG then it would be fine and SEC fans would be happy and so could the rest of the country.

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum